从合作原则分析《傲慢与偏见》的会话含义

AnalysisofConversationalImplicatureinPrideandPrejudicefromthePerspectiveoftheCooperativePrinciple从合作原则分析《傲慢与偏见》的会话含义iiiAnalysisofConversationalImplicatureinPrideandPrejudicefromthePerspectiveoftheCooperativePrincipleAbstractLanguageplaysanimportantroleinliteraryworksaswellastheshapingofcharactersandthearrangementofthescenario.JaneAusten,anEnglishfemalenovelistin19thcentury,isfamousforherwritingtechniquesforusingdialoguestoshowthedifferentcharacters’personalitiesandtoshowthesubjectthatshewantedtoconvey.Asanimportantpragmatictheory,proposedbyGrice,thecooperativeprincipleisofgreatsignificancetoguidethedailycommunication.PrideandPrejudiceisfulloftheusageofthecooperativeprincipleinthedialogueamongcharacters.Thedialoguewhichviolatesthecooperativeprinciplecanmakereadersownasenseofhumor,understandthethemeandhaveaunforgettableimpressionofcharacters.Theconversationalimplicatureproducedbyfloutingthecooperativeprinciplewillberepresentedbytheanalysisofthedialogues.Atthesametime,itprovesthefeasibilityofapplyingGrice’sconversationalimplicaturetheorytotheliteraryreview.Keywords:cooperativeprinciple;PrideandPrejudice;conversationalimplicatureⅱ从合作原则分析《傲慢与偏见》的会话含义摘要语言在文学作品和其文学人物形象的刻画以及故事情节的发展均发挥不可或缺的作用。19世纪的英国女小说家简·奥斯汀善于利用大量的对话来展示作品人物的性格和文章的主旨。由格莱斯提出的重要的语用学理论--合作原则，对于引导日常口语交际具有重要意义。合作原则充分运用于《傲慢与偏见》的人物对话中，违反该原则的对话可以让读者产生幽默感，有助于读者理解文章主旨，也可以让读者对作品中的人物保有深刻印象。本文中违反合作原则的会话含义将会通过分析该作品中的对话展现出来。同时，本文也证明了会话含义理论在文学评论中的可行性。关键词：合作原则；《傲慢与偏见》；会话含义Contents1IntroductionPrideandPrejudiceisthemasterpieceofBritishrealisticwriterJaneAustininthelate18thcenturyandthebeginningofthe19thcentury.Itisalsothemostpopularnovel.Thelanguageofthisnoveliswitty,freshandhumorous.InPrideandPrejudice,thestorywasdevelopedmainlyonthebasisofvariouslivelyandinterestingdialoguesamongcharacters.Thetheoryofconversationalimplicaturewhichmaintainsthecooperativeprinciplehasopenedanewwayofexplainingtheuseoflanguageandcaughttheattentionoflinguistsimmediately.Thisthesisaimsatanalyzingthedialogues’implicaturebasedonthecooperativeprinciple,hopingtoprovethepracticabilityofthepragmaticsinunderstandingthefictionsofJaneAustin.AllthedialoguesthatareanalyzedincaseanalysisarepickedfromPrideandPrejudice.ThethesismainlyfocusesthefloutingofthecooperativeprinciplewiththecollectionsofthelanguagedialogueschosenfromPrideandPrejudicewiththeclassificationoftherhetoricaldevices.ConversationalimplicaturewillbegeneratedwiththeviolationofthecooperativeprincipleandthisalsoprobetheapplicabilityofGrice’scooperativeprinciple.Thisthesisismainlydividedintofourparts.Partoneisconcernedaboutthegeneralintroductionofthemainideaofthisthesisandthelayoutofthisthesis.Parttwofocusesontheliteraturereviewwhichincludesthetheoryofconversationalimplicature,thecooperativeprinciple,thereasonsofchoosingPrideandPrejudice.Meanwhile,somepreviousstudiesofthecooperativeprincipleandPrideandPrejudicebothindomesticandabroadshouldalsobepaidspecialattentionto.Partthreecoverstheanalysisofsometypicalconversationswhichviolatethecooperativeprincipleandsomefiguresofspeechwillbementionedtohelpreaderstounderstandtheextrameaning.Partfourisabouttheconclusion.Afteranalyzingtheseconversations,wecanhaveamuchfullunderstandingofJaneAustin’sPrideandPrejudiceandwecanalsomakefulluseofthepragmatictheorytosensetheimplicaturethattheauthorwantstoconvey.21LiteratureReview1.1Thetheoryofconversationalimplicature1.1.1ThedefinitionofconversationalimplicatureAccordingtoHerbertPaulGrice(1975),toconversationallyimplicatesomethinginspeakingmeanssomethingthatgoesbeyondwhatonesaysinsuchawaythatitmustbeinferredfromnon-linguisticfeaturesofaconversationalsituationtogetherwithgeneralprinciplesofcommunicationandcooperation.1.1.2TheclassificationofconversationalimplicatureInGrice’sview(1975),theimplicaturecanbedividedintotwocategoriesconcerningtheconversationalimplicatureandcontext.Thefirstcategoryiscalledthegeneralconversationalimplicaturewhichindicatesthatthemeaningofconversationalimplicaturecanbegeneratedwithoutcontext.Theconcreteorspecificconversationalimplicatureasthesecondcategorywhichthecontextcanproduce.Weknowthatifwewanttoseekameaningbyviolatingacriterion,itmustbebasedonaspecificcontext.Therefore,Grice'sgeneralconversationalimplicatureshouldbelongtothecategoryofnon-conversationalimplicature.1.1.3ThecharacteristicsofimplicatureTowardtheendofhis“LogicandConversation”,Grice(1975)mentionedsomecharacteristicsofconversationalimplicatureasfollows:calculability,cancellability,non-detachabilityandnon-conventionality.Whenhearerscanunderstandtheimpliedmeaningthatspeakerswanttoconvey,thecalculabilityoftheconversationalimplicatureisconveyedwhilecancellabilityshowsthatthemeaningofthesentencewillbechangedifthespeakersaddordeletesomewords.Thenon-detachabilitymeanssomesynonymscanbeusedtoreplacethewordsinsentencewithoutalteringthemeaning.Thenon-conventionalityshowsthattherestandsalogicalrelationship–entailmentbetweentwosentences.1.2Cooperativeprinciple1.2.1ThedefinitionofcooperativeprincipleGrice(1975)noticedthatpeopledonotusuallysaythingsdirectlybuttendtoimplythemin3dailyconversationsandhepointedoutthatthereissomeregularityinconversation.Gricealsosuggestedthecooperativeprinciplewhichdescribeshoweffectivecommunicationinconventionisachievedincommonsocialsituations.Inotherwords,thecooperativeprincipleisusedtoshowthewayhowlistenersandspeakersactcooperativelyandmutuallyacceptoneanother.JeffriesandMcIntyre(2010)describeGrice’smaximsas“encapsulatingtheassumptionsthatweprototypicallyholdwhenweengageinconversation”.1.2.2TheclassificationandviolationofthecooperativeprincipleAccordingtoGrice(1975),thecooperativeprinciplefallsintofourcategoriesofmaximsasfollows:ThemaximofQuality:Donotsaywhatyoubelievetobefalseanddonotsaythatforwhichyoulackadequateevidence.ThemaximofQuantity:Makeyourcontributionasinformativeasisrequiredforthecurrentpurposeoftheexchangeanddonotmakeyourcontributionmoreinformativethanisrequired.ThemaximofRelation:Berelevant.ThemaximofManner:Avoidobscurityofexpression.Avoidambiguity.Bebrief(avoidunnecessaryprolixity).Beorderly.Peoplearesupposedtoobeythesemaximstoconverseinamaximallyefficientinarationalandcooperativeway.Theyshouldspeaksincerely,relevantlyandclearly,whileprovidingsufficientinformation(Levinson,1983:102).Thefactthatthecooperativeprincipleanditscomponentmaximsareexpressedintheimperativehasmisledmanyreaderstoregardthemasprescriptive:tellingspeakershowtheyoughttobehave;whilethetruthisthatthecooperativeprincipleismeanttodescribewhatactuallyhappensinconversation.Theuseoftermssuchas“principle”and“maxim”doesnotmeanthatthecooperativeprincipleanditsmaximswillbefollowedbyeverybodyallthetime.Peopledoviolatethefourmaximsandtelllies.1.3PreviousstudiesofthecooperativeprincipleandPrideandPrejudice1.3.1StudiesabroadofthecooperativeprincipleandprideandprejudiceThetheoryofconversationalimplicaturewhichmaintainsthecooperativeprinciplehaspavedanewwayofexplainingtheuseoflanguageandcaughttheattentionoflinguistsimmediately.4Therearemanyinterestingdialoguesofthedifferentcharactersintheprideandprejudiceandwecanfigureouttheconversationalimplicatureofthedialoguesonthefoundationofcooperativeprinciple.Throughtheconversationalimplicature,wecansensetheironyandhumorthatJaneAustinusedtodepictdifferentcharacters.Inasense,dialoguesconstitutedthewholestoryinPrideandPrejudice.Withoutdeviousplotsandthrillinggreatscenes,easyandelegantdialoguesgavefullexpressiontodifferentpersonalities.Grice’sconversationalimplicaturetheoryhereisusedtoanalyzethedialogueandbehaviorofthecharactersinPrideandPrejudicetofindouthowJaneAustindepictsthedifferentpersonalityofthecharactersandhowtoexpressemotionandservethethemeofthenovel.StudiesabroadofthecooperativeprincipleJeanStilwellPeccei(2008)requiredthatthespeakersandhearersbothneededtoobservetheprinciplenomatterhowdifferenttheywere.Grice’s(1975)announcedthefourtypesofviolationofthemaximswhichinvolvetheviolationofthequantitymaxim,theviolationofqualitymaxim,theviolationofrelationmaximandtheviolationofthemannermaxim.Ifweviolateanymaximofthecooperativeprinciple,wecangeneratedifferentconversationalimplicature.Levinson(1983),afamouslinguist,pointedoutthatconversationalimplicatureneededtobeproducedfollowingthepragmaticprinciple.Fromthiswecanseethatboththegeneralmeaningandthecanonicalimplicatureshouldbelongtothenon-conversationalimplicature,andthegeneralimplicatureistheconventionalmeaninginessence.DanSperberandDeirdreWilson(2001)arguedthatallGrice’smaximsincludingthecooperativeprincipleitselfshouldbereducedtoasingleprincipleofrelevance,whichisdefinedas:Everyactofostensivecommunicationcommunicatesthepresumptionofitsownoptimalrelevance.Thatis,everyutterancecomeswithapresumptionofthebestbalanceofeffortagainsteffort.Theassessmentofrelevanceisamatterofbalancingoutputagainstinputandspeakershouldmakeefforttomaketheassumptionclear.Aswecanowntheconceptionthattheforeignlinguistsmainlyfocusonboilingdownthemaximstoasetofprincipleswhicharetrulyindispensableanddonotoverlapatthesametime.Wecanalsofigureouttheconversationalimplicatureinaclearerwaythroughthemaximsofthecooperativeprinciple.StudiesabroadofPrideandPrejudiceAsAmericancriticsEdmundWilsoncommentedin1944,”Therehavebeenseveral5revolutionsoftasteduringthelastcenturyandaquarterofEnglishliterature,andthroughthemallperhapsonlytworeputationshaveneverbeenaffectedbytheshiftsoffashion:Shakespeare'sandJaneAusten's”.(Littlewood,1998:3)JaneAustenisoneofthegreatest,oneofthemostaccuratewritersofdialogueofherownoranyage,asDr.Chapmanclaims.(Lascelles,1995:96)TheconversationsinPrideandPrejudice,notedfortheemploymentofironyandsatire,attractgreatinterestsandscrutiny.JaneAustenexcelsinemployingdialogueinherfiction.Attemptingtomakesomepossiblecontributions,thisthesisaimstoanalyzetheconversationalimplicatureindetailfromtheperspectiveofpragmatics,morespecifically,theCooperativePrinciple(CP)inthehopeofgainingsomeinsightsintotheapplicationofpragmaticsinexaminingJaneAusten'sfiction.TheforeignscholarspaytheirattentionstotheironyandhumorthatJaneAustenusedtodepictthepersonalityofdifferentcharactersinPrideandPrejudice.Therefore,wecanusethedifferentdialoguesofthecharacterstoanalyzetheconversationalimplicaturethatimpliedthecharacteristicandpersonalitiesofthecharacterinthisnovel.1.3.2DomesticstudiesofthecooperativeprincipleandPrideandPrejudiceYangLiu(2004)hasmadeananalysisofconversationalimplicatureinPrideandPrejudicefromtheperspectiveofthecooperativeprincipleandthepolitenesstheory.Inherstudy,YangLiuexploresconversationalimplicatureinthisnovelfromtheperspectiveofpragmaticsbyanalyzingthedialogueofdifferentcharacters.Wangying(2010)hasmadeadiscourseanalysisoftheconversationinAustin’sPrideandPrejudicebyexploringthepersonalitiesofdifferentrolesinthisnovel.Themaximsofcooperativeprincipleandtheirviolationsarecarefullyillustratedintheanalysisforpersonalityexplorationandrelationshipexposition.Zhongyajuan(2014)madeananalysisofconversationalimplicatureinPrideandPrejudiceintermsofGrice’scooperativeprincipletoprobehowthisnovelportrayscharacters’personalitiesandrevealsemotionstoservethetheme.Wecanfindthatmostofthedomesticscholarsmainlyemphasizetheimportanceofconversationalimplicature.Atthesametime,theyallpickupsomedialoguesamongdifferentcharactersinPrideandPrejudice,thenanalyzetheconversationalimplicaturefromtheviolationofthefourmaximsofthecooperativeprinciple.Fromthestudyoftheconversationalimplicature,wecansensethespecialironyandhumorofJaneAustenandwecanalsoprovethenecessityofthepragmaticsinliterature.62CaseAnalysis2.1ConversationimplicaturegeneratedbyfloutingtheQuantityMaximAccordingtoGrice(1975),oneshouldconveythecontributionasitisrequiredandshouldnotmentiontheinformationmorethananotherneeds.Otherwise,onewilltendtoviolatethemaximofquantityandthentheconversationalimplicatureisproduced.Herecomessomeexamples.Example1“MydearMr.Bennett,”saidhisladytohimoneday,“haveyouheardthatNetherfieldParkisletatlast?”Mr.Bennettrepliedhehadnot.“Butitis,”returnedshe;“forMrs.Longhasjustbeenhere,andshetoldmeallaboutit.”Mr.Bennettmadenoanswer.“Doyouwanttoknowwhohastakenit?”criedhiswifeimpatiently.“Youwanttotellme,andIhavenoobjectiontohearit.”Thiswasinvitationenough.(P1)ThisutterancetakenfromtheMr.Bennettandhiswifeinpage1showsthedifferentcharactersbetweenthetwo.WecanknowthatMrs.Bennettwasextremelyexcitedforthearrivalofanunknownrichsinglemanbecauseherlifelongdreamwastoarrangeherdaughterstoarichguy.Assoonassheheardthisnews,shecouldnotwaittoshareitwithherhusband.However,fromthereplythatMr.Bennettmadewecanseethathedidnothavemuchinterestinitandhewastiredoftheendlesstalkingwhichcomefromhiswife.Then,hecouldonlysaythathehadnorighttorefusebutonlytoknowthenews.Actually,Mr.Bennettwasfairlyimpatientashiswifegavehimmoreinformationthanhereallyneeded.HerewecansaythatitisbecauseMrs.Bennettviolatedthemaximofquantitythatherhusbandturnedtogetannoyed.Also,wecanhaveageneralunderstandingofthecouple’spersonalities.Mrs.Bennettisverytalkativeandabitinconsiderateassheonlywantstotellthenewsthatshefeelsexcitedinspiteofthewillingofherhusband.Onthecontrary,Mr.Bennettisquietandtosomeextent,tolerant.Therefore,wecanimaginethefunnyscenethatthecouplemighthaveingettingalongwitheachotherintheirdailylife.Example2“HowdelightedMissDarcywillbetoreceivesuchaletter!”Hemadenoanswer.7“Youwriteuncommonlyfast.”“Youaremistaken.Iwriteratherslowly.”“Howmanylettersyoumusthaveoccasiontowriteinthecourseoftheyear!Lettersofbusinesstoo!HowodiousIshouldthinkthem!”“It’sfortunate,then,thattheyfalltomylotinsteadoftoyours.”“PraytellyoursisterthatIlongtoseeher.”“Ihavealreadytoldhersoonce,byyourdesire.”“Iamafraidyoudonotlikeyourpen.Letmemenditforyou.Imendpensremarkablywell.”“Thankyou—butIalwaysmendmyown.”“Howcanyoucontrivetowritesoeven?”Hewassilent.(P37)ThisdialoguehappensbetweenMissBingleyandDarcy.TherearesixquestionsthatwereproposedbyMissBingleybutonlytwoofthemgotaresponse.WecanhaveabravepredictionthatMissBingleyhassuchgreataffectiontoDarcythatshekeepsaskingquestions,hopingtogetDarcy’sattention.Sadly,shedidnothitthepointasshekeptaskingsomeirrelevantquestions,andaddingtheinformation.Asisknowntoall,whensomeoneisbusy,ifotherskeeptalkingbyhisside,themanwillnotmakethereactionthatyoureallyneedorjusttakeanignorantattitude.MissBingleyshouldaskquestionsasclearlyaspossibleandsheshouldalsoobeythemaximofquantity.OnlyinthiswaycanshedrawtheattentionofDarcy.Example3“IhopeMr.Bingleywilllikeit,Lizzy.”“WearenotinawaytoknowwhatMr.Bingleylikes,”saidhermotherresentfully,”sincewearenottovisit.”“Impossible,Mr.Bennett,impossible,whenIamnotacquaintedwithhimmyself;howcanyoubesoteasing?”Mrs.Bennettsaidonly,”Nonsense,nonsense!”“IamsickofMr.Bingley,”criedhiswife.“Iamsorrytohearthat;butwhydidnotyoutellmesobefore?IfIhadknownasmuchthismorning,Icertainlywouldnothavecalledonhim.Itisveryunlucky;butasIhaveactuallypaidthevisit,wecannotescapetheacquaintancenow.”(P8)WhenMr.BennettmentionedMr.Bingley’spreferencetoLizzy’shat,hiswifenotreceivinghisextrameaning,feltextremelyconfusedthenshebelieveditwasimpossibleandridiculous.Finally,Mrs.BennettturnedtogettiredofcoveringthetopicofMr.BingleybecauseshethoughtthatherhusbandwouldnotpayavisittoMr.Bingley.Tohersurprise,Mr.Bennetthadexactlygot8anacquaintanceofMr.Bingley.Mr.Bennettfloutedthemaximofquantityonpurposetoteasehiswifeinthisconversation.Theactionthathetookwasfairlysuitableforrevealinghisquirkandkeepinglistenersinsuspense.Meanwhile,wecansensetheamazingrelationshipbetweenMr.Bennettandhiswife.2.2ConversationimplicaturegeneratedbyfloutingtheQualityMaximJustasGricementionedthatifsomeonecoversomefalseinformationthushewillfloutthemaximofqualityincooperativeprinciple.Sometimesthespeakerexpresseshisemotionsuchasangerandcriticismbyaskingquestions.Doeshewanttogetananswer?Absolutelynot!Hejusthopesthatthelistenercanguesstheimpliedmeaningfromthequestionsthatheputforward.Thisisamanifestationoftheviolationofmaximofquality.Herecomestheexamples.Example1“Oh!Single,mydear,tobesure!Asinglemanoflargefortune;fourorfivethousandayear.Whatafinethingforourgirls!”“Howso?Howcanitaffectthem?”“MydearMr.Bennett,”repliedhiswife,”howcanyoubesotiresome!YoumustknowthatIamthinkingofhismarryingoneofthem.”(P2)Mr.BennettlikestomakesomejokesonMrs.Bennett.Hepretendedthathedidnotknowhiswife’sintentionofmarryingoneofherdaughterstotherichandsingleguy,Mr.Bingley.Whenheaskedquestions,healreadyknewthereactionthathiswifemaytake.Thisimplicationindirectlyindicateshisironytohiswife.HereMr.Bennettfloutedthemaximofqualityashemadethefalsecontributionthathedidnotknowtheplanofhiswife.Example2"Iseenooccasionforthat.Youandthegirlmaygo,oryoumaysendthembythemselves,whichperhapswillbebetter;forasyouareashandsomeasanyofthem,Mr.Bingleymightlikeyouthebestoftheparty."(P2)Mr.BennettansweredthisquestionwhenMrs.BennettinsistedonhisvisitingtoMr.Bingley.Hiswordsseemedverypoliteandenjoyable.HehighlypraisedMrs.Bennett,enhancingherpositivefaceandhisbeauty.Butfromthebackground,itiseasytoinfertheoppositemeaning.Themeaningheprovidedandhiswordsheheldbothapprobatethemaximattheexpenseofquality.Accordingtothe18thcenturyBritishconvention,onlymaleownershavetherighttovisitthenewneighbor.Therefore,itisimpossibleforMrs.BennettandherfivedaughterstohavechancetomeetMr.Bingley.Mr.Bennett’ssuggestioncontradictsthiscustom,suggestinghispointofviewandtheironicattitudetowardsMrs.Bennett.Meanwhile,therealsostandsthesatiretohiswife’sbeauty.Mrs.Bennettwasbeautifulinthepast,butitdoesnotexistanylonger.Mr.Bennett’spraise9toherbeautyrevealedhisironicattitudetohiswife.Herearealsosomerhetoricaldevicesthatareoftenusetoconveytheextrameaningthatthecharacterwantstoexpress.Metaphor,ironyandrhetoricalquestionsaretheprominentdevicesthatweneedtoconcentrateoninPrideandPrejudice.2.2.1MetaphorTheuseofmetaphorislikelytoproduceshumoranddelightfulatmosphere.Ironicandsarcasticfeelingcanbedelivereddirectlyaswell(ZhongYajuan,2014:18).Considertheexamplesbelow:Example1“Donnotkeepcoughingso,Kitty,forheaven’ssake!Havealittlecompassiononmynerves.Youtearthemtopieces.”(P6)FromthisutterancewecanlearnthatMrs.Bennettcomparehernervestoanobjectwhichcanbetoreintopieces.MetaphorisusedtoshowMrs.Bennett’sunhappiness.AccordingtoLackoffandJohnson(1980),thisderivesfrompeople’sconceptionofnervesinhumanexperience.Whenpeopletrytounderstandintangibleobjects,theyalwaysusetangibleobjectstohelpunderstandingasthispatternofthinkingisdeepinmindandpeoplewillsubconsciouslyuseit(WangYunli,2011:17).Weallknowthatnervescannotbepartedintopieces,soMrs.Bennettmadethewrongcontributionthatindicatedsheviolatedthemaximofqualitywiththehelpofmetaphor.Example2"Whatacharmingamusementforyoungpeoplethisis,Mr.Darcy!Thereisnothinglikedancing,afterall.Iconsideritoneofthefirstrefinementsofpolishedsocieties.""Certainly,sir;andithastheadvantagealsoofbeingvogueamongstthelesspolishedsocietiesoftheworld-everysavagecandance."(P20)ByglorifyingdancingasoneofrefinedamusementsinaristocraticsocietytowhichDarcybelongs,SirWilliamwantstostrikeaconversationwithDarcywhoremainssilentnexttohim(YangLiu,2004:28).However,Darcydidnotshowhisdisparagementtotheactivityofdancingandthepeoplewholikedancing.Metaphorisusedtounderstatethesocialstateandthehobbyofthearistocratic.Therefore,wecandrawaconceptthatDarcy’scontributionfloutsthemaximofquality.Example3“Mr.Bennett,howcanyouabuseyourownchildreninsuchaway?Youtakedelightinvexingme.Youhavenocompassiononmynerves.”“Youmistakeme,mydear.Ihaveahigherrespectforyournerves.Theyaremyold10friends.Ihaveheardyoumentionthemwithconsiderationthesetwentyyearsatleast.”(P2)Bennettisfretted,shewilltakehernervesasexcusetomakeherfamilysubmittoherwill(ZhongYajuan,2014:18).Mr.Bennettcomparedhiswife’snervestohisoldfriends.WecanhaveapictureofhowirritatedMrs.Bennettwas.WecanalsomakesensethattherelationshipbetweenthetwocanbeabitfunnyandMr.Bennettwasfairlygood-temperedforowingsuchaeasilymadwife.Tous,friendsarehelpfulandsincerebutherewhatMr.Bennettfeltwasendlesstiresomeandanxious.Asaresult,Mr.Bennettbreachedthemaximofqualityashechosethenegativemeaningoffriends.2.2.2IronyFromtheperspectiveofpragmatics,ironyisonekindofoff-recordpolitenessstrategythatdoestheFTA(face-threatening-act)indirectlybysayingtheoppositeofwhatspeakersreallymean(ZhongYajuan,2014:17).InAustin’sPrideandPrejudice,thedeviceofironyiscommonlyseenespeciallyamongdifferentdialogues.Payattentiontothefollowingexamples:Example1“Youwillhaveacharmingmother-in-law,indeed,andofcourseshewillbealwaysatPemberleywithyou.”(p.25)Justlikethephrasegoesthatrivalinloveisjealous.Mrs.BingleywasjealoustoDarcy’spreferencetoElizabeth.Therefore,Mrs.BingleyseizedallkindsofchancestodefameElizabeth’sfamilybackground.Actually,thissentencehappenedunderthecontextthatDarcyhighlyacclaimedElizabeth’sbeautifuleyes.Nevertheless,Mrs.BingleyremindedDarcyofElizabeth’spoorfamilyconditionforhavinganuncourteousmotherandannouncedthatElizabeth’smomwashismother-in-law.ThereactionthatMrs.Bingleytookobviouslydisobeyedthemaximofquality.Atadeeperlevel,itisasatireandawarmingtoMr.Darcy.TheimplicationisthatifDarcyfallsinlovewithElizabeth,hewillhavetoacceptElizabeth’smother,avulgaranduncultivatedmother-in-lawlivingwiththem.Infact,thisistheheartdiseaseofDarcy.Mrs.BingleyimposingtheseunfoundedassociationsonDarcyseemsridiculous,butitispreciselyindicatedtheDarcy’sabsurdactions.Example2"Whatshouldnotyoumind?""Ishouldnotmindanythingatall."11"Letusbethankfulthatyouarepreservedfromastateofsuchinsensibility.""Inevercanbethankful,Mr.Bennett,foranythingabouttheentail.Howcouldonehavetheconsciencetoentailawayanyestatefromone'sowndaughtersIcannotunderstand;andallforthesakeofMr.Collins,too!Whyshouldhehaveitmorethananybodyelse?""Ileaveittoyourselftodetermine,"saidMr.Bennett.(P105)ThetopicofthisconversationbetweenMr.BennettandMrs.Bennettwastheallocationoftheirproperty.Accordingtothelaw,ifMr.Bennettdies,theirinheritancewillbeturnedovertohiscousinandtheonlymaleheir-sir.Collins-becauseMr.Bennetthasnoson.ButMrs.Bennettdoesnotknow.Althoughshehasbeentoldthedecisionofarrangingtheirestatemanytimes,shestillinsistsinquestioningandcomplaining,whichmadeMr.Collinveryangry.ThediscoursemadebyMr.Collin"Letusthankyouformaintainingthisstateofignorance"isironic.Itjustmeanstheoppositemeaning.TheimplicationisthatMrs.Bennettextremelymindedthedistributionoftheirpossession.Thelastsentenceisalsoironic,contradictingthefactsofMrs.Bennett’sinabilityofdeterminingwhatisneeded.FromtheconversationalimplicaturewecanunderstandthatMr.CollindidnotreallyshowhisaffectiontotheactionthatMrs.Bennetttooksotheutterancethathemadeobviouslyfloutedthemaximofquality.Buttosomeextent,thediscoursethatMr.CollinconveyedcoulddecreasethedamageofMrs.Bennett’sself-esteemandalsocouldavoidtheawkwardnessbetweenthetwoinaface-to-facecondition.Example3“Heisasfineafellow,”saidMr.Bennett,assoonastheywereoutofthehouse,”aseverIsaw,hesimpers,andsmirksandmakeslovetousall.Iamprodigiouslyproudofhim.IdefyevenSirWilliamLucastoproduceamorevaluableson-in-law.”(P264)ThissentencewasmadebyMr.BennettwhenWickhamandLydialeftNewcastle,andWickhamwouldbecometheregulars.LydiahasbeenrunningawaywithWickhamandtheywillnotgetmarriedwith